I am not calling anyone wrong. I am stating the importance in allowing yourself to BE wrong, especially when we are talking about matters as old as this where absolute true meaning is difficult, if not impossible, to know.

I find I get a lot more out of having discussions with people who are searching for the answers than people who claim to HAVE them, in matters of faith.

I'm sure of nothing except the word of God and still I wrestle with it. The word speaks against what we see and experience, but that only means I am wrong, not the word of God. It's a silly example, but for two years I wrestled with the seeming contradiction between Acts 7:4 and Genesis 11-12. Two years I couldn't reconcile the dating. But I knew there had to be an answer because I really believed that the word of God was (is) without error, but I couldn't figure it out. Then I found the truth and I had my reconciliation. That is what faith is, evidence of things not seen. I knew the word of God is true, I just needed faith, and patience. The Holy Spirit helped me. Let Him help you. We can only give you ideas, but God knows what you need. Trust Him, not us.

Click to expand...

Faith is a wonderful thing, and we would be lost without it.

Humility is also something we need, especially in matters where we find ourselves in disagreement with one another.

Is it wrong to read and believe the clear reading of scripture? How does one reach a place of confidence in Gods Word?

Eph 3:12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Click to expand...

It is only wrong to those who have not spent much time studying, or those who do not agree with what is plainly said in the Bible. I helped to set up activities at a family reunion over the weekend, and I put together a Bible trivia for the relatives to try. One person was willing to try it, and she was a pastor's wife. She got all but 2 or 3 right. Most were not confident in their Bible knowledge and are not familiar with most of it. They wouldn't try it. Here are the trivia questions:

1. Who complained that her sister Mary would not help her prepare food as Jesus taught them?

2. Why did Sarah laugh when she found out she was going to bear a son?

3. How many people were present at the Last Supper?

4. Which specific law did the Pharisees accuse Jesus of breaking?

5. Who wrestled God for a blessing?

6. Complete the verse- Though I speak with the tongues(languages) of men and of angels, but have not _________, I have become as sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.

7. What part of the body is the light of the body?

8. In the parable of the sower and the seed, what are the four places on which the seed fell?

9.What did David take with him to meet Goliath?

10. Who was Moses’ successor?

11. What are the colors of the four horsemen’s horses in Revelation?

12. What did Jesus do right before and after saying, “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.”?

13. The river, which flowed from the Garden of Eden, divided into how many rivers?

14. How many times was the Apostle Paul stoned?

15. Who did Jesus name the “Sons of Thunder”?

16. How many brothers did Joseph in Genesis have?

17. Where did Mary and Joseph take Jesus to hide from Herod?

18. Who was Ruth’s famous great-grandson?

I don't think the questions are too terribly hard. Anyone who has studied the Bible or listened to a Bible-based preacher or went to Sunday School for a decent period of time should be able to answer many of the questions. Knowing the Bible should allow you the confidence to understand it.

It is only wrong to those who have not spent much time studying, or those who do not agree with what is plainly said in the Bible. I helped to set up activities at a family reunion over the weekend, and I put together a Bible trivia for the relatives to try. One person was willing to try it, and she was a pastor's wife. She got all but 2 or 3 right. Most were not confident in their Bible knowledge and are not familiar with most of it. They wouldn't try it. Here are the trivia questions:

1. Who complained that her sister Mary would not help her prepare food as Jesus taught them?

2. Why did Sarah laugh when she found out she was going to bear a son?

3. How many people were present at the Last Supper?

4. Which specific law did the Pharisees accuse Jesus of breaking?

5. Who wrestled God for a blessing?

6. Complete the verse- Though I speak with the tongues(languages) of men and of angels, but have not _________, I have become as sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.

7. What part of the body is the light of the body?

8. In the parable of the sower and the seed, what are the four places on which the seed fell?

9.What did David take with him to meet Goliath?

10. Who was Moses’ successor?

11. What are the colors of the four horsemen’s horses in Revelation?

12. What did Jesus do right before and after saying, “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.”?

13. The river, which flowed from the Garden of Eden, divided into how many rivers?

14. How many times was the Apostle Paul stoned?

15. Who did Jesus name the “Sons of Thunder”?

16. How many brothers did Joseph in Genesis have?

17. Where did Mary and Joseph take Jesus to hide from Herod?

18. Who was Ruth’s famous great-grandson?

I don't think the questions are too terribly hard. Anyone who has studied the Bible or listened to a Bible-based preacher or went to Sunday School for a decent period of time should be able to answer many of the questions. Knowing the Bible should allow you the confidence to understand it.

Click to expand...

Good questions. Here is one more......Why did Noah take those two mosquitoes on the Ark???

People are terribly sure about a lot of things that I don't really see that it's possible to be terribly sure about. Which is why I tend to be very suspicious of people who claim to know 100% about them. We are dealing with the passage of a lot of time, translations, retranslations, mistranslations. Best we can do is to make our best guesses and remain open to the possibility we are incorrect about them.

Click to expand...

"don't really see that it's possible to be terribly sure about"
"best guesses and remain open to the possibility we are incorrect about them"

What do you call that, a position, a viewpoint, or other terms more appropriate ________?

Question: are you sure 100%, without a doubt, that should be the correct position, a viewpoint, or other terms more appropriate ______?

"don't really see that it's possible to be terribly sure about"
"best guesses and remain open to the possibility we are incorrect about them"

What do you call that, a position, a viewpoint, or other terms more appropriate ________?

Question: are you sure 100%, without a doubt, that should be the correct position, a viewpoint, or other terms more appropriate ______?

Click to expand...

I call it being as realistic as possible given the process the source material has been through prior to arriving in front of us several thousand years after the fact.

As regards scripture, I am never 100% sure about anything. But I am reasonable, and in gleaning the best answer I would also wish to deal with other reasonable people. And being reasonable means you must remain open to several possibilities in the event something is unclear.

I call it being as realistic as possible given the process the source material has been through prior to arriving in front of us several thousand years after the fact.

As regards scripture, I am never 100% sure about anything. But I am reasonable, and in gleaning the best answer I would also wish to deal with other reasonable people. And being reasonable means you must remain open to several possibilities in the event something is unclear.

Click to expand...

The answer seems to be very sure that is the correct approach to be reasonable : )

Ok. That sounds reasonable to me : )

Romans 14:19-23New King James Version (NKJV)
19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. 21 It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak.[a] 22 Do you have faith?[b] Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin.[c]

Is it wrong to read and believe the clear reading of scripture? How does one reach a place of confidence in Gods Word?

Click to expand...

Many would argue that it is naive, but, then again, consider the source.

From my point of view, scripture is made up of third person accounts of past happenings (most of the OT), first person accounts of what they witnessed (most of the NT), and prophecy (i.e. Daniel, Isaiah, and Revelations).
The historical happenings of the OT have been largely verified by archaeologists over the last 200 years or so. So, even a thorough skeptic would be required to accept them as largely accurate.
The New Testament is composed mainly of first person accounts and can be trusted to be the authors best attempt at "writing what he saw".
The best testimony for the value of the NT is that those who actually follow the wisdom found therein become changed people.
If it was not true it would not work.
Prophecies are either right or wrong. Once found to be wrong they can be discarded. Centuries have come and gone and Isaiah and Daniel are still right on the mark. That is accuracy that defies all odds.

I call it being as realistic as possible given the process the source material has been through prior to arriving in front of us several thousand years after the fact.

As regards scripture, I am never 100% sure about anything. But I am reasonable, and in gleaning the best answer I would also wish to deal with other reasonable people. And being reasonable means you must remain open to several possibilities in the event something is unclear.

Click to expand...

1. What kind of power does God have?
2. You have said before that you do not think He has the power to change people from what they were born as. Does He limit himself?
3. Does He only have power in the spirit world?
4. Do you think God can cause humans to print the best translations of His Word?
5. Would He sit back and allow His message to be undermined by being produced as vague or just plain wrong?
6. Does He want us to follow Him, or guess as to what we are to believe?

1. What kind of power does God have?
2. You have said before that you do not think He has the power to change people from what they were born as. Does He limit himself?
3. Does He only have power in the spirit world?
4. Do you think God can cause humans to print the best translations of His Word?
5. Would He sit back and allow His message to be undermined by being produced as vague or just plain wrong?
6. Does He want us to follow Him, or guess as to what we are to believe?

Click to expand...

I'm presuming many of these questions especially 2 are directed at Peace's advocation for acceptance of LGBT persons. I wanted to weigh in because I think your post makes a fundamental assumption that we need to be scholastics, an unfortunate inheretnance from the RCC.

This doesn't fly with me because all of these questions assume we are capable of knowing the divine nature, which we are not.

As for me when it comes to SSA, it is not to say that God cannot remove that cross to bare, but I have never seen it and I have not the right to expect Him to do it.

Also, I've since moved from reading scripture as literal and instead as inspired.

1. What kind of power does God have?
2. You have said before that you do not think He has the power to change people from what they were born as. Does He limit himself?
3. Does He only have power in the spirit world?
4. Do you think God can cause humans to print the best translations of His Word?
5. Would He sit back and allow His message to be undermined by being produced as vague or just plain wrong?
6. Does He want us to follow Him, or guess as to what we are to believe?

Click to expand...

1. I don't know.
2. If He has the ability to change a person's sexuality, or their eye color, then He's never demonstrated it. I will have to assume he either cannot or is more likely uninterested.
3. It isn't my place to say.
4. Yes, and also the worst.
5. It would appear so.
6. He wants us to follow Him, and not zealots who speak in His name.

1. I don't know.
2. If He has the ability to change a person's sexuality, or their eye color, then He's never demonstrated it. I will have to assume he either cannot or is more likely uninterested.
3. It isn't my place to say.
4. Yes, and also the worst.
5. It would appear so.
6. He wants us to follow Him, and not zealots who speak in His name.

Click to expand...

Yes, God's ways are mysterious. So, He wants us to follow Him. How does He show us how to follow Him?

We each have our own beliefs on this, so I would like to know yours. You seem to distrust Bible translations, so this made me wonder about how you discern how to follow God?

Click to expand...

I follow God and Bible translations to the best of my ability and knowledge but that does involve being open to the possibility that there are several meanings or opinions to contend with. What this means is I'm not correcting others about their beliefs nor do I believe other Christians should be correcting ME when I have done my own considerations on the matter.

Having said that there is absolutely nothing wrong with presenting another viewpoint to another Christian believer. As long as you're not insisting it's the one true correct understanding of it.

I follow God and Bible translations to the best of my ability and knowledge but that does involve being open to the possibility that there are several meanings or opinions to contend with. What this means is I'm not correcting others about their beliefs nor do I believe other Christians should be correcting ME when I have done my own considerations on the matter.

Having said that there is absolutely nothing wrong with presenting another viewpoint to another Christian believer. As long as you're not insisting it's the one true correct understanding of it.

Click to expand...

Seems reasonable. How do you understand 2 Timothy 3:16 ? All translations I can find use "correction" or "correcting", except Young's Literal which uses "set aright" which seems to be the same as correction.

Seems reasonable. How do you understand 2 Timothy 3:16 ? All translations I can find use "correction" or "correcting", except Young's Literal which uses "set aright" which seems to be the same as correction.

Click to expand...

The way I read that is that you should use scripture to correct people. Which I'm guessing was a more straightforward process at the time those words were written.

Many would argue that it is naive, but, then again, consider the source.

From my point of view, scripture is made up of third person accounts of past happenings (most of the OT), first person accounts of what they witnessed (most of the NT), and prophecy (i.e. Daniel, Isaiah, and Revelations).
The historical happenings of the OT have been largely verified by archaeologists over the last 200 years or so. So, even a thorough skeptic would be required to accept them as largely accurate.
The New Testament is composed mainly of first person accounts and can be trusted to be the authors best attempt at "writing what he saw".
The best testimony for the value of the NT is that those who actually follow the wisdom found therein become changed people.
If it was not true it would not work.
Prophecies are either right or wrong. Once found to be wrong they can be discarded. Centuries have come and gone and Isaiah and Daniel are still right on the mark. That is accuracy that defies all odds.

Click to expand...

You are correct. I would only add that the prophecies stated in the Bible are 100% correct and not a single one has been proven to be wrong as of yet. TIME still moves forward and may cause some questions but my money is still on Isaiah and Daniel.

Seems reasonable. How do you understand 2 Timothy 3:16 ? All translations I can find use "correction" or "correcting", except Young's Literal which uses "set aright" which seems to be the same as correction.

Click to expand...

2 Tim. 3:16
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness".

If you do not mind, may I jump in here with my 2 cents?

The "correction" given here does IMO mean to set things right in our lives ----correction of error.

The Scriptures IMO are not only profitable for salvation but for our growth in the Christian life. They are not just the road map to heaven but for life itself and the warning here for "correction" is to make sure that we do not fall into error and fail to grasp Bible doctrine.